From WEIRD to Wise

The field of psychology has long relied on research conducted primarily with WEIRD populations—Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. While these studies have contributed significantly to our understanding of human behavior, they reflect a narrow slice of the global population. In fact, less than 18% of the world's population lives in WEIRD societies, yet this group makes up the vast majority of psychological research participants.

This raises a serious issue: we’ve built much of clinical psychology on findings from a subset of humanity that is, by global standards, atypical. What works for a college student in Boston may not generalize to a farmer in rural India, a refugee from Sudan, or even a working-class family in Appalachia. It doesn’t really work for a plumber or farmer living within the United States fully either, right?

Why the WEIRD Problem Matters for Clinicians

Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan’s 2010 paper, “The Weirdest People in the World?”, revealed that psychological science has been built largely on findings from WEIRD samples. Yet these individuals are often psychological outliers, especially in areas such as perception, reasoning, moral judgment, and social behavior.

Key findings:

• In moral reasoning studies, American undergraduates showed a high reliance on rule-based logic, while participants in non-industrialized societies relied more on relationship and context-based reasoning.

• Studies on visual illusions (e.g., Müller-Lyer) reveal that WEIRD populations—due to their exposure to carpentered environments—are more susceptible to certain perceptual distortions.

• Economic behavior varies significantly: in the Ultimatum Game, some small-scale societies rejected the idea of fairness as defined in WEIRD settings, favoring communal harmony or ritual exchange.

Despite such variability, findings from WEIRD samples are often generalized as universal psychological truths—a deeply flawed practice with real consequences in clinical settings.

How PBT Like ACT Addresses the WEIRD Gap

Process-Based Therapy avoids the one-size-fits-all approach and instead emphasizes core psychological processes that are functionally assessed and contextually applied. This allows clinicians to meet clients where they are—not just geographically or culturally, but personally and historically.

Process-Based Therapy (PBT), including models like Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), offers a way forward. Grounded in evolutionary science, functional contextualism, and idiographic assessment, PBT focuses on tailoring interventions based on core biopsychosocial processes—rather than static protocols tied to diagnostic labels.

This shift is not just theoretical; it’s ethical, evidence-informed, and clinically effective.

Clinical Examples Bridging the Gap

1. Fusion in a Collectivist Culture: A client from a collectivist background experiences distress when their values conflict with family roles. Rather than reframing this as “enmeshment,” ACT supports exploration of self-as-context, valued action, and perspective-taking without imposing Western norms of autonomy.

2. Pain and Willingness in Rural Settings: A client from a rural background describes suffering in terms of “bearing the load.” ACT uses this language to introduce the concept of willingness—not as passivity, but as an act of strength aligned with values.

3. Mindfulness with Religious Clients: Rather than using secular mindfulness language, ACT may integrate practices such as prayer, scripture reflection, or ritual to foster present-moment awareness, while maintaining fidelity to underlying processes.

   
   

Key Takeaways for Clinicians

• Less than 18% of the global population lives in WEIRD societies, yet the majority of psychological interventions are based on this subset.

• Psychological processes are not universal in form, but can be universal in function when understood and applied through a contextual lens.

• PBT models like ACT offer flexible, culturally sensitive, and individualized care grounded in evidence-based principles that transcend narrow population samples.

• The future of therapy is not in rigid protocols but in adaptive, process-oriented approaches that treat the whole person in their lived context.

For more like this, be sure to sign up for the weekly newsletter here:

Subscribe to the Weekly Newsletter Here